Posts from August 2009

August 31, 2009

All right, all you show-tune queens. Stop downloading that bootleg of the Finnish cast of Spring Awakening for a second and do something productive with your time.

One of my Boston Conservatory students -- the very talented and entrepreneurial Tyler Paul -- was recently the associate producer on a benefit recording for the Hirshberg Foundation for Pancreatic Cancer Research. Tyler tells me that he holds the cause of raising funds for and awareness about pancreatic cancer research very dear to his heart, as he lost his beloved great uncle to the disease early last year.

The recording is called Heart and Music, and it boasts performances from quite a few of my BoCo students, including Marissa Miller, Sarah Drake, Ben Simpson, Niki Sawyer, and Mr. Tyler Paul himself. The recording features a number of popular, contemporary theater songs, such as "In Whatever Time We Have" from Children of Eden, "A New World" from Songs for a New World, and the title song, "Heart and Music" from A New Brain. The recording also includes some pop standards, such as "Let it Be" and "Bridge Over Troubled Water." All of the proceeds go directly to the Hirshberg Foundation.

Heart and Music is available now on iTunes; in fact, it's currently ranked as the #10 vocal album, right between Josh Groban and Norah Jones. As Tyler said to me in an email, "Not too shabby, huh?"

August 28, 2009

We've been hearing off and on about a new revue of Stephen Sondheim's work with the unbearably precious name iSondheim. The show is being compiled and directed by James Lapine, longtime Sondheim collaborator.

The show was originally supposed to run at Atlanta's Alliance Theater this past April and May, but that production was canceled because of the projected production costs and the weak economy. As the awful title implies, iSondheim was to have included a great deal of technology -- multimedia, video, projections, etc. -- featuring interviews with Sondheim himself, intermingled with live performances of songs from Sondheim's career. But the production requirements apparently made the show untenable for a regional, non-profit run in the middle of a recession.

More recently, there's been chatter on the Rialto about a New York run for iSondheim, under the auspices of the Roundabout Theater, and starring none other than the glorious Barbara Cook, who would be making her first appearance in a non-concert, non-benefit Broadway show in nearly forty frickin' years. The show would also feature two additional singers, yet to be cast. The wonderful Liz Callaway was supposed to have starred in the Alliance run. Wouldn't it be great to see her treading the boards again? Perhaps with her equally marvelous sister, Ann Hampton Callaway?

However, iSondheim seems to have hit a bit of a snag, according to Michael Riedel's column today in the New York Post. Apparently, Mr. Sondheim himself isn't happy with the revenue percentage that the Roundabout wants from any future touring company of the show. Something tells me Steve is going to get his way; it would seem that the Roundabout needs this show -- financially and artistically -- a lot more than Sondheim needs the Roundabout. The good news is that the iSondheim name, according to Riedel, is very likely to change. He mentions that both Virtual Sondheim and Sondheim on Sondheim have been under consideration as replacement titles, although neither seems to be much an improvement.

Here's hoping that the differing parties iron out their differences so that we can all get to see both Stephen Sondheim and Barbara Cook back on Broadway where they belong.

August 27, 2009

A number of things have been making me cranky lately. Not sure if it's just my mood, or if these items are genuinely annoying. So, rather than addressing each item separately, I figured I'd just get them all out of the way in one peevish post.

Bye Bye Birdie - The New York Daily News reports that the star of the upcoming Broadway revival of Bye Bye Birdie, Gina Gershon, won't be performing the show's iconic Shriner's Ballet. The article quotes Gershon as saying the dance was cut because it was too "gang rape-y." As other commentators have pointed out, that's never seemed to be a problem before, despite being Tams-Witmark's number-one show for decades. The more likely explanation: Gershon can't handle the dance. If they're so concerned about modern sensibilities, will Gershon be performing the regressive and sexist "An English Teacher"? Will the chorus girls still be fawning and fainting to the salacious sight of Conrad Birdie's gyrating hips? The show is a period piece. If you don't like the period, don't do the piece. Peeve Factor:7 out of 10. If you want to see a real pro in action, click here to watch Chita Rivera perform the Shriner's Ballet.

West Side Story - According to the New York Times, the current smash-hit Broadway revival of West Side Story has changed back much of the show's much-touted Spanish to the original English lyrics and text. As you may know, director Arthur Laurents brought in Lin-Manuel Miranda (In the Heights) to translate huge chunks of the show into Spanish. The article quotes Laurents as saying the Spanish was "an experiment." Yeah, a failed experiment. As I've written about in my reviews of the show itself and of the CD, I wasn't a fan of the Spanish text. I found it alienating and thought it robbed two terrific songs ("I Feel Pretty" and "A Boy Like That/I Have a Love") of their humor, pathos, and drama. But I also thought that Miranda's lyrics didn't match the quality of Sondheim's original work. Peeve Factor:5 out of 10, mitigated by the fact that they've, for the most part, reverted to the infinitely preferable original words.

"Nine" - The more I hear about Rob Marshall's forthcoming film version of Nine, the less excited I become. First, the delectable Javier Bardem dropped out, replaced by the talented but IMHO considerably less sexy Daniel Day Lewis. Now, according to Playbill, Maury Yeston has provided three new songs for the movie: "Guarda la Luna," "Cinema Italiano," and "Take it All." Which is fine, but to make room, they're cutting at least five of the original songs: "Simple," "Be On Your Own," "Grand Canal," "Nine," "The Bells of St. Sebastian's." Boo and grrr. (For a detailed discussion of the cut and added songs, check out a post by my friend Kevin at Theatre Aficionado at Large.) Peeve Factor: 9 out of 10. Pun intended. I'm not a knee-jerk purist, but the movie is going to need to be pretty spectacular to make up for the butchering of the score. Of course, the "Sweeney Todd" film involved a tremendous amount of cutting as well, and I raved about that movie in my review. So, the jury's still out, despite my current annoyance.

Ragtime - The press folk for the upcoming Broadway revival of Ragtime have recently been touting the new visual identity for the production. (See left) Apparently, it's the work of some famous Italian illustrator. Whatever, it's washed-out, flat, and unmemorable. Plus, the physical arrangement seems borrowed from the logo to The Secret Garden. Of course, I was also nonplussed by the logos for Hair and A Catered Affair, and impressed by that of Cry-Baby. So there's no necessary connection between the quality of an individual show and that of its marketing materials. Peeve Factor: 2 out of 10. Like many of you, I'm simply thrilled that Ragtime is getting another chance on Broadway. During its original run, it was overshadowed by The Lion King and hampered by irresponsible -- and now felonious -- producing.

Rumors have been circulating for weeks about Angela Lansbury's involvement in A Little Night Music, but this is the first I've heard about Catherine Zeta-Jones. I'm not sure what I think of CZJ as Desiree. She certainly has musical-theater experience, but I didn't think she really deserved an Oscar for the movie version of "Chicago." She was fine, but unexceptional.

But, irrespective of whether CZJ can pull off the part, there's the Antonio Banderas factor to consider. It's very unlikely that the recent Broadway revival of Nine would have gotten off the ground if it hadn't been for his presence, and as long as he stayed with the show, it did terrific business. But as soon as he left, business plummeted, despite the presence of replacement Guido John Stamos.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the same dynamic will play out with CZJ in Night Music. There's no question that she'll be a huge box-office draw, but once she leaves, the show will likely close. Unless, of course, they can get some other Hollywood star to take her place. (Rene Zellwegger as Desiree? The mind boggles...) And what are the odds that CZJ is likely to stick around for more than 6 months, a year tops?

I adore A Little Night Music, and have been longing for a strong Broadway revival of the show, of which this production would be the first. I'm not usually a pie-in-the-sky kind of guy, and I know that the economic realities and vagaries of producing a Broadway show can induce producers to find ways to mitigate their risk. I can certainly understand the producers' wanting to bring in a name, but there's a part of me that wishes they would rely on the strength of the show itself and the quality of the production.

August 19, 2009

I must confess that I never really paid all that much attention to the American Repertory Theater, and not simply because the organization really didn't do all that many musicals. There was just something about the show choices that never really appealed to me. It was always Henry IV, Part II or a revival of The King Stag. I do have to say that, whenever I did make it across the Charles to the Loeb Drama Center, I was almost invariably impressed by what I saw. The productions were usually innovative and interesting, and featured extremely talented performers.

But the A.R.T. just wasn't generating a lot of excitement in the Boston area, at least not among my circle of theater cronies. And the A.R.T. rarely originated a production that moved to Broadway, as the Steppenwolf Theater in Chicago so frequently does. Not that this is necessarily the goal for a regional theater, but, rightly or wrongly, the A.R.T. was never really on my radar.

Diane Paulus has single-handedly changed that. Paulus recently shot to fame as the director of the current hit Broadway revival of Hair. (Read my review.) Shortly after I saw the Central Park production (read my review), I heard that Paulus would be taking over as A.R.T. artistic director. Suddenly, I became a bit more interested in what the A.R.T. was doing.

I recently interviewed Paulus for an article in artscope, a local arts magazine. That article comes out in September, and focuses on the A.R.T.'s upcoming season, as well as Paulus's vision for the future of the organization. I threw in a few questions about Hair, and recently posted that portion of my interviewin these pages.

But I did also want to give my readers a heads-up about three shows that the A.R.T. is doing this fall, all under the rubric of Shakespeare Exploded. First up is The Donkey Show, which takes the basic plot of A Midsummer Night's Dream and sets the action in a 1970s disco. I may be a tad biased here, as three of my Boston Conservatory students are in the cast. But there was something about the way Paulus described the show to me that was infectious, and has me eagerly anticipating the show. If the name sounds familiar, The Donkey Show ran for six years Off-Broadway. I had heard of the show, but never got around to seeing it in New York. The show runs at the A.R.T.'s Zero Arrow Theater (renamed Club Oberon for the run of the show) in Harvard Square from August 21st through January 2nd.

Next up is Sleep No More, an experiential theatrical event based on Macbeth, and told in the style of a Hitchcock thriller. The show was developed by noted British theater troupe Punchdrunk. The production takes place in a renovated school in Brookline, Mass., and guides the audience through four stories of the school, not unlike the ambulatory action in the 1980s Off-Broadway show Tamara. Sleep No More runs from October to January. Finally, there's Best of Both Worlds, which infuses The Winter's Tale with the sounds of gospel music and R&B. The show will also feature a rotating roster of choirs and choruses from the Boston community. This holiday-themed show will run at the Loeb Drama Center from November to January.

It's not clear to me whether these productions are actual musicals per se, although they all seem to feature quite a bit of music, particularly The Donkey Show and Best of Both Worlds. But, hey, I'm open-minded, and I do make the occasional foray into non-musical theater. (Just to keep up appearances, you know.) But, musicals or not, each of these three productions seems fascinating in its own way, and the Shakespeare Exploded festival makes me quite eager and hopeful to see what the remainder of Paulus's tenure at the A.R.T. will bring.

August 15, 2009

While teaching my course on the history of musical theater at the Boston Conservatory, I frequently point to Oscar Hammerstein II
as the most important person in the history of musical theater. I
genuinely believe that. Hammerstein was not only crucial for what he
did, but also in whom he taught and inspired, namely one Stephen
Sondheim.

To understand Hammerstein's immeasurable
contributions, it's important to understand integration, one of the
most important concepts in the evolution of musicals. Integration
basically means the trend toward having every element of a show serve
some dramatic purpose. As Richard Rodgers famously once said, the reason that Oklahoma
worked as well as it did was because "the orchestrations sound the way
the costumes look." This always surprises my students, but there was a
time when songs in a musical didn't have much to do with the plot, and
dance was mere decoration. And that time was basically B.H. (Before
Hammerstein)

That's a gross simplification, of course, but Oscar
Hammerstein was indeed an integration pioneer, starting with his work
in operettas and musical comedy, continuing with the seminal Show Boat,
and culminating in his work with Rodgers. Hammerstein didn't invent
integration, but he did more than any other single person to make it
come about, and the rest of musical-theater history rests squarely on
his shoulders and accomplishments.

My admiration of
Hammerstein got me thinking about which other people are responsible
for the development of the musical-theater form, and since I've been a
list-making mood lately, well, you can probably see where this is
heading. Here then is my attempt to list the most influential people in
the history of musical theater. Some of these names will be very well
known, others not so much. I've included links for all the names, plus
brief explanations for those I deemed it appropriate. I'm sure that
there will be many people who feel that I've left someone out, or
ranked someone too low or too high. If so, feel free to drop me a line.

As with all of my other lists, this one will be listed as a sub-page of in the left-hand margin.

August 14, 2009

I recently had a chance to speak with the delightful Diane Paulus, whom most of you probably know as the talented director of the current hit Broadway revival of Hair. Well, Paulus also recently took over as the artistic director of the American Repertory Theater in Cambridge, Mass., and I was interviewing her for an article that I was writing for artscope a local arts magazine.

That article is about the A.R.T.'s upcoming season, and Paulus's plans to shake up that 30-year-old institution, but I couldn't resist throwing in a few questions about Hair. The article comes out in September, but here are some musings from Paulus that didn't make it into the article.

EIKILFM: I have to say that you completely changed my opinion about Hair. I always thought it was this great score hampered by an overly fragmented libretto.

PAULUS: Well, we really did a lot of work on the book. We streamlined and focused it. During the Hair rehearsal process, I had this deep partnership with James Rado. [Rado was one of the original authors of Hair. His writing partner, Gerome Ragni, died in 1991.] I never talk
about it as a revival, but as a re-imagining of the original work.Jim
and I were joined at the hip, working on a way to craft a new version of the book. We built
a very trusting relationship, and there was this incredible combination of
Jim, who was there and lived it, and created the show, and me, coming in with a deep respect for the show, but also a fresh eye. Jim had every bit of
information about the show, from when it was created to how it's been
done for the past forty years.

EIKILFM: What's your personal connection to the show?

PAULUS: Well, I was born in 1966, so I wasn't really old enough to remember the 1960s. I always like to say that I missed my decade, because I really wish I had lived through the '60s. But I guess now I have the benefit of not having seen
the original show and getting hung up in my head about it was supposed to be. When
I got the call from the Public Theater, I had never seen a production of Hair or
even read the script, just the liner notes from the album. So when I started to work on the show, I had this deep love of that
wonderful music, and I had my fantasy about how the production would sound and what it would feel like, and how to revive the '60s from the inside out.

EIKILFM: The cast of Hair really seems like this cohesive unit. How did you achieve that tribal feel in rehearsal?

PAULUS: It actually started one step before the rehearsal process with casting. When I was asked to do the original concert version in 2007, I knew that we needed the right people, people who were going to
invest themselves in the show not as actors but as human beings, fully relating to
the issues. Of course, we needed people with great voices -- and great hair! -- but we really needed to know where their hearts and minds were. And that led to the rehearsal process, where it wasn't just a show but a cause, a mission, a communication that matters. And they took that process very seriously. And now, two years later, 23 of those original 26 people are still with the show. At first, a lot of them were daunted. They said, "Our generation isn't like this." But that was in 2007, pre-Obama, and I think now young people have realized that they can create change, and they're all like activists now.

EIKILFM: For instance, the upcoming march on Washington.

PAULUS: That's right. We’re all going to Washington for a day. [Paulus refers to the National Equality March in support of gay-marriage rights. The producers of Hair have canceled the October 11th performance so that the cast can participate.] You can tell that the cast really take the show and its message seriously, and that's what people are responding to when they see the show. As we need to recast, there will be a weeding-out process as we try to find people who aren't just talented, but who also care passionately about the planet and gay rights, and other important issues. We just recast our first new Broadway cast member, and she’s all of like 20
something, and she said to me, "I am so honored to be part of this. It means so much to me to be a part of a show that I can really engage myself in." When you think about it, there really aren't that many opportunities like this, so I think we'll be able to find more people like her out there.

EIKILFM: What have you noticed about the audience response to Hair?

PAULUS: What
makes me happier than anything is to see the young people, coming to
Broadway and seeing and reacting to the show as if it were written
yesterday. Because Hair really isn't a period piece. It's a show that says just as much about today as it does about the '60s. It says, "This is American history, but this is also what it means to be alive and a
young
person, even today." So you have these young people coming to the show, and they're owning it, and I just love that.

EIKILFM: Hair features a lot of audience involvement, and seems to invite the audience to participate, sing along, even dance in the aisles. A number of recent newspaper articles in both New York and London have lamented the deterioration of theater behavior. It sounds as though you might have a different take on that.

PAULUS: Well, I think there are different kinds of theater. Historically, theater hasn't always been this quiet, sit-down affair. It certainly wasn't in Shakespeare's day. Theater is like sports, you have golf and tennis over here, and the whole
audience gets quiet, and you don’t make a sound. At the other end, you have ice hockey
and everybody's screaming. But we never mix up golf and hockey. I honestly
believe there’s a spectrum, even in theater. Are you going to talk at a Peter Brook production of Hamlet? Or The Seagull? Of course not. You have certain types of behavior that work for different kinds of theater. But my gripe is that
people tend to say, "Well, that’s the way theater is. You have to be quiet." Everything doesn't necessarily have to be like The Seagull. You can have Hair or The Donkey Show. [Paulus's first production at the A.R.T. is a re-staging of her New York hit, The Donkey Show, a raucous retelling of Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream set in a 1970s disco club.]I think we have the possibility of letting other sorts of behavior be released, and enlivening what we
think theater is and what it can do.

August 12, 2009

I'm going to try to avoid the spider metaphors here, but the Interwebs (oops...) have been all atwitter this week about the alleged demise of the highly anticipated Spider-Man musical. We've been hearing for months about how director Julie Taymor was being rather profligate with the investors' money. The show's capitalization has been rumored to be as high as $45 million, which is more than twice as expensive as any other show in Broadway history.

Last week, Variety reported that the massive production had ground to a standstill because the investors have simply run out of cash. Earlier this week, the gadflies on All That Chat were buzzing about how the actors in the show had been released from their contracts, and were free to pursue other work. Then today, Michael Riedel, The New York Post's gadfly extraordinaire, gleefully announced that, although the show's investors have been frantically trying to line up additional financing, no one is biting, and the show may well be dead in the water.

But even if Spider-Man does proceed, the prospects for the show turning a profit would likely be grim. According to Riedel's sources and/or calculations, with a $45-million capitalization, Spider-Man would need to run at capacity for 5 years to break even. Compare that to Wicked, which despite a capitalization north of $10 million, reportedly recouped in about 14 months. One of the factors driving up the Spider-Man production costs was that the Hilton Theater reportedly needed to be gutted and rebuilt to accommodate Taymor's design concept. Well, the Hilton has indeed been gutted, but now that Spider-Man is apparently moribund, that leaves Broadway with a big ole empty cavern on 42nd Street.

Potentially lost in the shuffle is a score by Bono and The Edge, which Riedel refers to as "moody and melodic, if not all that theatrical." Could the score possibly resurface, say as a concept album, or individual tracks on a future U2 release? Or perhaps Spider-Man the show could find a berth in, say, Las Vegas, where a $45-million price tag would be more in line with the other resident shows ensconced on the strip? Whatever, it's looking increasingly likely, if not downright certain, that Spider-Man won't be flying on Broadway any time soon.

August 10, 2009

Once my students are through venting their respective spleens over The Most Overrated Musicals,
they get a chance to get their hominy grits going in the other
direction and write about their choices for the most underrated
musical.

These papers are usually much more pleasant to read,
but not simply because they have a positive tone. At this point in the
semester, most of my students have caught on as to what I'm looking for
(a coherent thesis, specific examples, etc.) and the papers are
typically more well-reasoned and thoughtful.

But the underrated
paper is also a chance for me to bond with my students over
much-beloved shows that for some reason never caught on, or perhaps did
catch on, only to fade from memory.

Here, then, is my own list of
musicals that don't quite get the credit that they deserve. Feel free
to disagree as well as submit your own candidates.

August 08, 2009

I've really been in a listing sort of mood lately. I've always loved making lists, and it seems that my readers also like reading through them. Recently, I posted about my new list of The Most Beautiful Theater Songs Ever, which was extremely popular. In fact, I received more comments on that post than any other in the three-plus-year history of my blog. By a factor of three.

I'm all in favor of giving my readers what they want. And I noticed that the number-one search term on my blog has become "overrated musicals," which nudged "next to normal" and "paulo szot gay" out of the top spot. So I've created my own list of The Most Overrated Musicals, although I'm sure some of my choices will cause some consternation. As I've done with my other lists, I've created a separate sub-page for this one. All of my sub-pages are listed n the left-hand margin.

Some history: Every year, I ask my Boston Conservatory students to write two
different papers, one defending their choice for the most underrated
musical of all time, and the other for the most overrated. The tasks are subjective and arbitrary, but it gives them a chance to start thinking about what makes good shows good and vice versa.

Some of these shows are big
hits that IMHO are a tad overblown. Others are classics of which I've
never really understood the appeal. Still others are cult classics that
-- again, IMHO -- don't quite merit cult status.

Bear in mind
that I'm not saying that these shows are bad. Some of these shows I
genuinely like, or at least appreciate. I just think, on the whole and
for various reasons, they're not exactly as amazing as some people make
them out to be. Feel free to disagree, as well as to submit your own
candidates.

Variety recently ran a piece talking about the pros and cons of billing a tryout production as "Broadway-bound," citing both Catch and First Wives as examples. The producers of First Wives Club are of the opinion that the "Broadway-bound" moniker gives a boost to ticket sales, and in fact the show has extended its San Diego run until the end of August. However, the folks involved with Catch Me If You Can have been very careful to call the Seattle run a "world premier," possibly to hedge their bets in case the show needs work.

Well, according to Michael Riedel of the New York Post, Catch Me If You Can would seem more likely to be bound for Broadway, whereas First Wives Club could well be dead in the water. The critical response to First Wives was, in Riedel's words, "harsh," and even worse was the word of mouth among potential investors. The show is pleasing the California crowds, but the producers are scrambling to fund a move to New York.

Meanwhile, the advance word on Catch is relatively positive, although the show is apparently in need of some polish. Catch is scheduled to open tonight (8/6/09), and I've found no indication that the delayed previews have changed this, so the reviews will likely appear tomorrow.

Here's a promotional clip from the show, featuring Aaron Tveit (in the Leonardo DiCaprio role) performing the number "Live in Living Color." Um...gee, I hope the show is better than that clip. Much better. The song itself is unimpressive, with a decent tune but generic lyrics that tell me nothing about this character. And Jerry Mitchell's choreography here is atrocious, like something from a bad community production. Perhaps it's supposed to be bad, kind of like the garish costumes? Who knows. Yeah, it's not entirely fair to judge the show solely from this clip, but there's not much here that impresses me.

Then again, if I had only seen one number from Hairspray -- say, one of the forgettable numbers, like "It Takes Two" or "Without Love" -- I probably wouldn't have been all that stoked either. But the way "Live in Living Color" was shot would seem to indicate that this clip was meant for press distribution, so this was the number that someone somewhere chose to best represent the show. But there's no questioning the talent of the team behind Catch Me If You Can. (Book: Terrence McNally, Music and lyrics: Marc Shaiman and Scott Wittman, Direction: Jack O'Brien.) Count these gentlemen out at your peril. So I remain hopeful that they'll be able to pull the show into shape before its likely Broadway bow.

August 04, 2009

I get hate mail. I guess it comes with the territory. I'm pretty honest with my views, although I certainly do try to back those views up with credible support. And I must confess I have a tendency to get a tad snarky when it comes to writing up a review on a show that...well...sucked.

Ergo, the hate mail. Here's an email that I received recently from the author of a show to which I gave a rather negative review:

I'm sorry you were so unhappy watching the performance of my musical, [Suck-Job Special]. I feel like I owe you a little happiness. In
fact, reviews like yours gave me an uneasy feeling -- a feeling that
I should give back the honors and the piles of royalties that this
musical of mine has brought me over the twelve years, and continues to
bring me. And there were many, many productions over those years,
successful both with audiences and critics throughout the country. Anyway, here's the part that will make you happy: That feeling about giving it all back? It passed.

In other words, he's laughing all the way to the bank. Well, all I can say is: No, he's not. This show is not doing that well at the box office, and I would be very surprised if it had any kind of afterlife once it closes. But even if it did, so what? Since when is economic success equivalent to artistic achievement? If only his show were as well-crafted as his email, I might have given it a better review. I have no intention of responding directly to this gentleman, but I did make mention of the email on Facebook and Twitter. (Follow me on Twitter @ccaggiano) I reprint the essence of those posts here:

Dear Bad Writer: Are you sending angry emails to everyone who panned your show? You must be very busy.

Of course, many of my homies came to my defense. A college friend wrote me saying "You obviously are doing something right. People never respond strongly to the mediocre. Congrats." I must admit that I get a sinking feeling whenever I see the name of a composer, librettist or lyricist in my in-box. I usually reread my review before I read their correspondence to solidify my resolve, and sometimes wait a day or two before I'm ready to face the music, as it were.

I was reminded of the hate-mail kerfuffle when my dear friend Steve on Broadway sparked a lively discourse on Twitter when he asked if anyone had ever walked out of a Broadway show. (You can read the responses on Twitter by searching for #walkoutofshow.) I myself have never walked out of a Broadway show, nor any professional production for that matter. Obviously, that doesn't mean that I've enjoyed everything that I've ever seen. As the above discussion would indicate, that's hardly the case. But the reason that I've never walked out is that, as a teacher and indeed student of musical theater, I always learn something even from the most atrocious shows, even if it's what not to do.

But never once did I consider walking out. Before I started blogging, I hung in there because the more notorious the flop, the more I got to dine out on the whole sordid story with my theater friends. And now that I have the blog, I get to vent in printed form. I mean, come on, aren't the bad reviews the most fun to read? Well, they're pretty darned fun to write as well. I guess I'm able to suffer through the worst with the knowledge that I'll be able to get a bit of my own back when I sit down at my computer.

What about you, dear reader? Have you ever walked out of a Broadway show? A touring company? A London show? I mean, even I've walked out of bad community productions or high school travesties. I'm talking professional shows, put on by people who really should know better, or presumably should be able to produce better. If you have walked out, what was the show, and why? If you didn't leave, why did you stay?

August 01, 2009

Ever since I fell in love with "Another Winter in a Summer Town" from Grey Gardens, I've been thinking about which theater songs are the most beautiful. Not necessarily the best, or else I'd simply be listing Stephen Sondheim's
entire catalog. No, the most beautiful. The ones that, when you hear
the first notes, you melt. The ones that murder you each time you hear
them because they're just so frickin'...well, beautiful.

So,
I've been keeping a running list. Subjective, to be sure, but a fun exercise nonetheless. For many of these songs, their beauty
hinges on their emotional context within the show. For others, it's
simply the songs themselves. But one of the things I've always loved
about theater music is that you're not just listening to music, you're
learning something about the singer, you're following that character's
growth, or lack thereof.